Tax fine query
Discussion
Pontoneer said:
Excellent - you presumably have a dated invoice from the dealer for the new bike and detailing the part exchange of the old one .
If you do a search on here , there are quoted cases where others have taken DVLA to court over exactly the same thing and have used the Interpretations Act ( which basically says that , once you have posted the form off as required by law , you have done all that is required of you and , effectively , DVLA would have to prove you never posted it ) .
I am no lawyer , but there should be some on here who can confirm this .
My own opinion is that it is wrong for an agency who make errors to then also be the arbiter of 'appeals' when things go wrong ; an appeal ought always to be to a higher authority , not the one who made the error in the first place .
I would be disinclined to 'appeal' and more inclined to 'reject' the fine and suggest that the proper place to argue the point is in court .
Yes, I have the invoice from the dealer, with all dates & details of the bikes present. It will take 7-10 days for my appeal documents to arrive - I will send this off with all the evidence and post back with the outcome. Thanks for the information regarding the Interpretations Act, I did not know about this before.If you do a search on here , there are quoted cases where others have taken DVLA to court over exactly the same thing and have used the Interpretations Act ( which basically says that , once you have posted the form off as required by law , you have done all that is required of you and , effectively , DVLA would have to prove you never posted it ) .
I am no lawyer , but there should be some on here who can confirm this .
My own opinion is that it is wrong for an agency who make errors to then also be the arbiter of 'appeals' when things go wrong ; an appeal ought always to be to a higher authority , not the one who made the error in the first place .
I would be disinclined to 'appeal' and more inclined to 'reject' the fine and suggest that the proper place to argue the point is in court .
If it is of any help , the following is taken directly from the Act
References to service by post.
Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.
References to service by post.
Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.
Pontoneer said:
If it is of any help , the following is taken directly from the Act
References to service by post.
Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.
That's great, thanks. Going to go through these idiots. References to service by post.
Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.
Pontoneer said:
Failing the above , another idea may be to pay the £80 under duress to make the matter go away for now , but notifying them that you intend to then take DVLA to small claims court to claim it back ?
Not a chance - the thieving barstewards are not getting a penny from me if I can help it. Nimby said:
The V5C/3 (the yellow part) does say that you should phone the DVLA if after a month you haven't received confirmation you are no longer the Registered Keeper.
FWIW usually four vehicles in our household, changed regularly, and we've never had a problem with the DVLA.
Hmm yeah it does say that. I'm not sure what that means in terms of my case as a whole though. Really need to find an expert in the field... FWIW usually four vehicles in our household, changed regularly, and we've never had a problem with the DVLA.
I've never had a problem with the DVLA either. In ten years of buying / selling motors...
MJDM said:
Nimby said:
The V5C/3 (the yellow part) does say that you should phone the DVLA if after a month you haven't received confirmation you are no longer the Registered Keeper.
FWIW usually four vehicles in our household, changed regularly, and we've never had a problem with the DVLA.
Hmm yeah it does say that. I'm not sure what that means in terms of my case as a whole though. Really need to find an expert in the field... FWIW usually four vehicles in our household, changed regularly, and we've never had a problem with the DVLA.
I've never had a problem with the DVLA either. In ten years of buying / selling motors...
The interpretations act, as mentioned is your friend. Dispute it to the point of going to court. The DVLA will either back down or you will win.
Have a read of DVLA v Liquid Knight.
Also, Google DVLA v Peck, DVLA v Collins, DVLA v O'Sullivan, etc..
Also, Google DVLA v Peck, DVLA v Collins, DVLA v O'Sullivan, etc..
MJDM said:
The highly intelligent lady I spoke to was having none of it. Her response to everything I asked (including to speak to her superior) was that "you need to pay the fine or write to the collection agency, we can't do nothing" etc.
"Highly intelligent", but not a grammarian. Perhaps, though, she did mean "We can't do nothing". Did you ask her then what they could do?Streaky
SS2. said:
Have a read of DVLA v Liquid Knight.
Also, Google DVLA v Peck, DVLA v Collins, DVLA v O'Sullivan, etc..
For gods sakes don't read DVLA vs Liquid Knight - you'll be there forever!Also, Google DVLA v Peck, DVLA v Collins, DVLA v O'Sullivan, etc..
Short sweet letter telling them that under the Interpretations Act all you are required to do to notify them is to post it.
As you believe you have complied, you look forward to seeing them in court. Don't forget to mention that as you have attempted to resolve the matter prior to court involvement, that you will bring this correspondence to the courts notice, and will ask for compensation for any out of pocket expenditure and lost time.
surveyor said:
SS2. said:
Have a read of DVLA v Liquid Knight.
Also, Google DVLA v Peck, DVLA v Collins, DVLA v O'Sullivan, etc..
For gods sakes don't read DVLA vs Liquid Knight - you'll be there forever!Also, Google DVLA v Peck, DVLA v Collins, DVLA v O'Sullivan, etc..
Short sweet letter telling them that under the Interpretations Act all you are required to do to notify them is to post it.
As you believe you have complied, you look forward to seeing them in court. Don't forget to mention that as you have attempted to resolve the matter prior to court involvement, that you will bring this correspondence to the courts notice, and will ask for compensation for any out of pocket expenditure and lost time.
DON'T FORGET:
WHEN YOU SEND YOUR EVIDENCE, KEEP COPIES AND USE ROYAL MAIL GUARANTEED NEXT DAY DELIVERY.
It is not just signed for, it is separate from other mail and tarcked all the way.
It is worth the cost for the peace of mind.
Also, pass all the details of this to your MP - and your local paper!
WHEN YOU SEND YOUR EVIDENCE, KEEP COPIES AND USE ROYAL MAIL GUARANTEED NEXT DAY DELIVERY.
It is not just signed for, it is separate from other mail and tarcked all the way.
It is worth the cost for the peace of mind.
Also, pass all the details of this to your MP - and your local paper!
Mill Wheel said:
DON'T FORGET:
WHEN YOU SEND YOUR EVIDENCE, KEEP COPIES AND USE ROYAL MAIL GUARANTEED NEXT DAY DELIVERY.
It is not just signed for, it is separate from other mail and tarcked all the way.
It is worth the cost for the peace of mind.
Also, pass all the details of this to your MP - and your local paper!
Every correspondence between myself and the DVLA since this mishap happened has gone recorded... WHEN YOU SEND YOUR EVIDENCE, KEEP COPIES AND USE ROYAL MAIL GUARANTEED NEXT DAY DELIVERY.
It is not just signed for, it is separate from other mail and tarcked all the way.
It is worth the cost for the peace of mind.
Also, pass all the details of this to your MP - and your local paper!
For your reading pleasure (or more likely not) here is a copy of the letter I am writing to the DVLA. This is my last chance to correspond with the DVLA directly - if they refuse this appeal, my only other routes are to refer it to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, or go to court.
For those reasons I want to get it right first time, if you think I have missed anything feel free to comment and let me know
For those reasons I want to get it right first time, if you think I have missed anything feel free to comment and let me know
MJDM's letter to the DVLA said:
Late Licensing Penalty (LLP) dispute form
Your dispute
1a – Please tell us why you think our decision is wrong. It is not enough to say ‘I disagree with this decision’ or ‘I do not think I am liable’.
I think your decision is wrong, because when I transferred my vehicle to (bike dealer) on 08/09/2012, I posted the V5C/3 part of the logbook by 1st class post. By doing this, I have satisfied my legal obligations in full. May I refer you to the Interpretation Act of 1978, section 7:
References to service by post.
Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.
Or, in other words, by posting the V5C/3 slip by 1st class mail at the time of the transfer, I have done everything required of me by law. It is up to the DVLA to prove that this did not happen, and not for me to prove that it did happen.
I did not receive an acknowledgement letter, however the DVLA have no statutory power requiring anyone to contact them should they not receive an acknowledgment letter.
2 – Please enclose the evidence that:
• Shows you had taxed the vehicle or made a sorn when it was due, or
• Demonstrates that you had told the DVLA of the sale or transfer of the vehicle before the breach of the CR.
I do not have any such evidence. This is because the V5C/3 slip that I posted at the time of the transfer of the vehicle did not reach the DVLA, or has been lost by the DVLA. Again, I have satisfied my legal obligations in full by posting the V5C/3 slip 1st class at the time of transfer. Legally, it is the duty of the DVLA to prove that this did not happen; I am under no legal obligation to prove that it did happen.
3 – Please tell us about any circumstances surrounding the breach that you feel we have not taken into account.
My previous correspondence with the DVLA regarding this matter contained the following:
• An explanation that I had sent the V5C/3 slip by first class mail at the time of transfer
• my argument that by doing so, I have satisfied my legal obligations in full
• evidence showing the date of the transfer of my vehicle to the dealer, which took place before the tax ran out
It is my opinion that none of this was taken to account. The letter I received in response contained no reference whatsoever to my individual case, or the evidence and explanations I supplied. To me, it looks like a generic template, simply explaining to me WHY the late licensing penalty exists.
Once again, I have supplied evidence which clearly shows that I transferred the vehicle before the date that the alleged offence of late tax payment took place. This is undeniable proof that I was no longer the owner of the vehicle when the tax ran out. I have even included a bank statement, which shows the transaction taking place. This can be matched to the debit card receipt, attached to the receipt of transfer.
In conclusion:
• I have supplied sufficient evidence to show that I transferred the vehicle on 08/09/2012, and was no longer the keeper on the date of the alleged offence of late tax payment
• I have informed you that I sent the V5C/3 part of the logbook by 1st class mail at the time of the transfer, and that by law, this was everything required of me
• I did not receive an acknowledgement letter from the DVLA, but the DVLA has no statutory power requiring anyone to contact them should they not receive an acknowledgment letter.
• Legally, I am under no obligation to prove that I sent the V5C/3 slip; by posting it 1st class, I have done everything required of me. It is up to the DVLA to prove that this did not happen.
I see the DVLA’s demands for me to pay this penalty as nothing short of attempted aggravated theft. I look forward to hearing your decision, and I would add that if the decision is not satisfactory, I will happily have the case referred to the PHSO, or see you in court.
Regards,
Your dispute
1a – Please tell us why you think our decision is wrong. It is not enough to say ‘I disagree with this decision’ or ‘I do not think I am liable’.
I think your decision is wrong, because when I transferred my vehicle to (bike dealer) on 08/09/2012, I posted the V5C/3 part of the logbook by 1st class post. By doing this, I have satisfied my legal obligations in full. May I refer you to the Interpretation Act of 1978, section 7:
References to service by post.
Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.
Or, in other words, by posting the V5C/3 slip by 1st class mail at the time of the transfer, I have done everything required of me by law. It is up to the DVLA to prove that this did not happen, and not for me to prove that it did happen.
I did not receive an acknowledgement letter, however the DVLA have no statutory power requiring anyone to contact them should they not receive an acknowledgment letter.
2 – Please enclose the evidence that:
• Shows you had taxed the vehicle or made a sorn when it was due, or
• Demonstrates that you had told the DVLA of the sale or transfer of the vehicle before the breach of the CR.
I do not have any such evidence. This is because the V5C/3 slip that I posted at the time of the transfer of the vehicle did not reach the DVLA, or has been lost by the DVLA. Again, I have satisfied my legal obligations in full by posting the V5C/3 slip 1st class at the time of transfer. Legally, it is the duty of the DVLA to prove that this did not happen; I am under no legal obligation to prove that it did happen.
3 – Please tell us about any circumstances surrounding the breach that you feel we have not taken into account.
My previous correspondence with the DVLA regarding this matter contained the following:
• An explanation that I had sent the V5C/3 slip by first class mail at the time of transfer
• my argument that by doing so, I have satisfied my legal obligations in full
• evidence showing the date of the transfer of my vehicle to the dealer, which took place before the tax ran out
It is my opinion that none of this was taken to account. The letter I received in response contained no reference whatsoever to my individual case, or the evidence and explanations I supplied. To me, it looks like a generic template, simply explaining to me WHY the late licensing penalty exists.
Once again, I have supplied evidence which clearly shows that I transferred the vehicle before the date that the alleged offence of late tax payment took place. This is undeniable proof that I was no longer the owner of the vehicle when the tax ran out. I have even included a bank statement, which shows the transaction taking place. This can be matched to the debit card receipt, attached to the receipt of transfer.
In conclusion:
• I have supplied sufficient evidence to show that I transferred the vehicle on 08/09/2012, and was no longer the keeper on the date of the alleged offence of late tax payment
• I have informed you that I sent the V5C/3 part of the logbook by 1st class mail at the time of the transfer, and that by law, this was everything required of me
• I did not receive an acknowledgement letter from the DVLA, but the DVLA has no statutory power requiring anyone to contact them should they not receive an acknowledgment letter.
• Legally, I am under no obligation to prove that I sent the V5C/3 slip; by posting it 1st class, I have done everything required of me. It is up to the DVLA to prove that this did not happen.
I see the DVLA’s demands for me to pay this penalty as nothing short of attempted aggravated theft. I look forward to hearing your decision, and I would add that if the decision is not satisfactory, I will happily have the case referred to the PHSO, or see you in court.
Regards,
So, after 6 letters from a debt collection agency threatening me with bailiff visits and being taken to court, and 2 previous responses from the DVLA ignoring my appeal and telling me I was liable for the LLP, here is a letter I received this morning from the DVLA enforcement center:
DVLA said:
Dear MJDM
Thank you for returning the completed Dispute form (V991) sent to you in respect of the Late Licencing Penalty (LLP).
Having reviewed the information provided, I confirm it is inappropriate to pursue the LLP. I am sorry that this was not identified previously. The LLP is withdrawn, the enforcement case has now been closed and the vehicle record updated accordingly. Please retain this letter as confirmation of our records.
Your sincerely
Some guy from the DVLA
Thank you for returning the completed Dispute form (V991) sent to you in respect of the Late Licencing Penalty (LLP).
Having reviewed the information provided, I confirm it is inappropriate to pursue the LLP. I am sorry that this was not identified previously. The LLP is withdrawn, the enforcement case has now been closed and the vehicle record updated accordingly. Please retain this letter as confirmation of our records.
Your sincerely
Some guy from the DVLA
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff